If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Based on what I saw in this thread, the problem is likely a combination of the mount and the scope.

Generally, a little while back I got my hands on three Aero Precision mounts and have spent some time messing with them. All apply uneven pressure onto the scope tube and with some scopes it can cause an issue.

I do not have too much mileage with he Strike Eagle, but I have seen this basic design used by a few other brands and it left me soundly unimpressed. If you want a low range variable from Vortex, extend your budget a bit and get a 1-4x24 PST.

The reason you were only seeing the problem at 6x is that when you change the magnification of a scope, there are a couple of internal lens groups that move. It is most likely that when you set the scope to 6x, the one of the lens groups moves right under the portion of the tube that was being deformed by the out of round ring. That would preclude the lens group from moving the way it is supposed and possibly make it susceptible to recoil.

Have you tried shooting groups at lower magnifications? like 3x or 2x?

It is entirely possible that the scope is damaged and I am sure Vortex will take care of you. However, with the Aero Precision mounts I have, I concluded that in order to use them, they will have to be lapped and only used on guns with minimal recoil.

SPUHR make both QD and standard 4-Torx screws cantilever mounts for the AR15. If you use a standard screw-attach and have got a torque screwdriver, or mark the spot when the torque is the same you can take them off and on and retain a meaningful zero.

Couldn't see any cantilever AR15 mounts on the Near website. Do you know if they offer any?

I don't think they do, I was putting it up since those Alphamounts look so beautiful. I know you can get them in various heights. I am also uncertain about the cantilever requirement when everyone and their mother are running full length picatinny rails on their handguards

I am aware of the source of most scopes today, and am quite happy with my Japanese glass (SWFA). Of course with more disposable income I would be buying Zeiss and Swarovski and Trijicon (I did score a nice used 10x Habicht Nova 10 years ago) . I want to get a Leica some day.

I just see the Spuhr as a ludicrously overpriced option for what you get (by about $175).

I seem to recall 52' you being suspicious of QD mounts from your courses. At that time I had a big think and have now gone all screw clamps for main scopes. I have a couple of LaRue QD's now sitting idle, replaced by the peace of mind that comes from straight clamps with known torque. More streamlined too and less chance of catching on clothing. I'm thinking the only reason QD would be better than screws was if you needed to remove a damaged scope in a hurry. Everything else is just a couple of minutes with a torque screwdriver.

PVBoom...One man's 'ludicrous' is another man's pride and peace of mind. Everyone has a perception of what is value for money. The scope in the picture is a March Tactical (made in Japan). The types of guns talked about on this forum are relatively cheap when compared against other shooting disciplines so it's all relative. Coming from an F Class background where competitive guns cost $5,000+ I don't see $175 as anything more than 'buy once cry once'.

Leica does make nice glass. I have an 8*42 pair of Leica binoculars and the colors pop. It has 'Made in Portugal' on the side....

I've only seen loose mounts when people don't follow the distractions and tighten them with good pressure at the 45˚ angle.

So far I have disconnected my LT130s across several trips to the range. Of those several trips, the mount has been switched to another rifle, fired four groups (to gauge the accuracy of the barrel and build, not for zero) and returned to the donor rifle; then another time- fired for group, taken off, rifle fired three rounds with irons, and replaced; and swapped several times on one trip. All to verify zero. All removals and re-attachments have yielded complete RTZ inside MOA at 100 yards. The largest change was from rifle to rifle at two moa right, then when replaced on the original rail, it was at the original zero. I couldn’t be happier with its performance.

As far as “chewing up the rail”, I guess you have a case of - what do you want? A mount that works, allow precision QD across multiple removals, multiple weapons, and still keeps you on target, or not? The rifles rail is a tool not jewelry. The LT QD mounts are jewelry for your rifle. It says: yea, it really is a great rifle, and yea - it’s real. Though both my mounts both came with a dab of anti seize on the cams. I find the anti seize cleans off and the FDE ceracote on my rail is in tact still. I replace the compound when necessary. My cams are set to the instructed 45degrees at contact, then levered tight. Go figure.

Just my impressions so far. And yes, I can and do demonstrate the reliability to anyone that doubts it. There are more and much less expensive mounts, but I have found or heard of none anywhere that are more versatile.